If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the Forum Rules. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Welcome to RPGamer's new forums running under Vanilla Forums! If you're run into any odd or strange issues after our software migration please see this thread for details

Leave your feedback in the following ways!Post in this thread.Email us at [EMAIL="podcast@rpgamer.com"]podcast@rpgamer.com[/EMAIL]Leave us a voicemail at (608) 729-4098Email us an mp3 or m4a voicemail at [EMAIL="podcast@rpgamer.com"]podcast@rpgamer.com[/EMAIL]

Re: Mike reviewing mediocre (or worse) older games ...usually because that's what we're about to talk about on Backtrack.

In a way, I agree with the person who wrote the comment. I've echoed the same comment myself. I think it would be nice to have a tighter focus on older, obscure games that were actually good. However, Paws is right. Mike is on a mission to play his collection to completion, and chronicle his journey. He doesn't allow the direction of said journey to be swayed by winds telling him Persona 3 is sooo much better than Thousand arms! :)

I would encourage that listener to check out our review archives. I believe they may be sorted by score. It is an excellent way to find a few of the more obscure RPGems that slipped through the cracks.

Re: Mike reviewing mediocre (or worse) older games ...usually because that's what we're about to talk about on Backtrack.

In a way, I agree with the person who wrote the comment. I've echoed the same comment myself. I think it would be nice to have a tighter focus on older, obscure games that were actually good. However, Paws is right. Mike is on a mission to play his collection to completion, and chronicle his journey. He doesn't allow the direction of said journey to be swayed by winds telling him Persona 3 is sooo much better than Thousand arms! :)

I would encourage that listener to check out our review archives. I believe they may be sorted by score. It is an excellent way to find a few of the more obscure RPGems that slipped through the cracks.

I still wonder how you get Paws and I mixed up since we sound nothing alike. ;)

I think the point I failed to make on the 'cast is that just because a game reviewers poorly doesn't mean it shouldn't be given some TLC. Maybe a game gets a crap score because it's repetitive, or too linear, and those two things drag it down from a good review (say, a 3.5-4) down to a less than stellar review (2.5-3). Neither of those things bug me -- sometimes they've even added to games for me -- so hey, there's a game I wanna try I didn't know about. Sucky games can be fun too :(

I'm having the same issue... I pre-ordered Disgaea for Vita and have had the PS3 game for like forever and never played it. Figure I might actually play it as a portable. I think it suits a good portable type game.

Tactical rpg's work very well as portable games. Nintendo caught onto that with Final Fantasy Tactics Advance, Fire Emblem and Advance Wars, probably others that slip my mind too. I think taking it in bite size chunks helps break up some of the monotony that comes with those games.

Good podcast, though, I take issue with Sam and Scott's claim that the ending to ME3 was 'good'.

It was not consistent with the general feel of the game, took away the choice that you had grown so used to throughout all three games, and, frankly, it reeked of the writers attempting to be Stanley Kubrick and they ended up looking like M. Knight Shamalan. And even then, that's giving the 'writers' too much credit.

I found it rather strange that a pair of reviewers for a genre known for stories are passing over writing errors made by Bioware, which is comprised of people who tend to err and make mistakes, not to mention the sections which felt rushed and resulted in cut content, and to go so far and to insult the people that dare say that ending was, in fact, a turd (speaking as a writer myself who knows a poorly made ending when he sees one), speaks quite poorly of them.

But for what it's worth, Chris, I too play ME3 multiplayer on PC. If you wish to play, friend me. If you're interested, PM me.

Good podcast, though, I take issue with Sam and Scott's claim that the ending to ME3 was 'good'.

It was not consistent with the general feel of the game, took away the choice that you had grown so used to throughout all three games, and, frankly, it reeked of the writers attempting to be Stanley Kubrick and they ended up looking like M. Knight Shamalan. And even then, that's giving the 'writers' too much credit.

I found it rather strange that a pair of reviewers for a genre known for stories are passing over writing errors made by Bioware, which is comprised of people who tend to err and make mistakes, not to mention the sections which felt rushed and resulted in cut content, and to go so far and to insult the people that dare say that ending was, in fact, a turd (speaking as a writer myself who knows a poorly made ending when he sees one), speaks quite poorly of them.

But for what it's worth, Chris, I too play ME3 multiplayer on PC. If you wish to play, friend me. If you're interested, PM me.

I don't think by any means did Scott and I say it was perfect, it's just we didn't have the same kinds of beef with it that others did. I didn't review the game for RPGamer, nor am I planning to do an SO, but while I understand the inconsistencies, that didn't ruin the experience or the impact that the end had on me. For me it was an emotional rush. Was it sloppy? Yes. But was it this giant turd people made it out to be? No. As I've said in a few circles, the ending reminds me of that of the works of E.M Foster, Robert Silverberg and Issac Asimov. They always wrote endings that never felt completely resolved and often left it to the imagination of the reader as to what may or may not have happened.

At the end of the day, I stand by my statement. I think how people are treating this situation is overblown and completely ridiculous. The entitlement issues of people demanding a new ending and acting out like spoiled children is something I personally won't stand for and I know that's how both Scott and I felt. I just felt that the way people were crying foul seemed really inappropriate. There was no way to create an ending that everyone wants and is going to love. I love stories, and yes inconsistencies bother me, but it didn't ruin my entire experience.

I don't think by any means did Scott and I say it was perfect, it's just we didn't have the same kinds of beef with it that others did. I didn't review the game for RPGamer, nor am I planning to do an SO, but while I understand the inconsistencies, that didn't ruin the experience or the impact that the end had on me. For me it was an emotional rush. Was it sloppy? Yes. But was it this giant turd people made it out to be? No. As I've said in a few circles, the ending reminds me of that of the works of E.M Foster, Robert Silverberg and Issav Asmiov. They always wrote endings that never felt completely resolved and often left it to the imagination of the reader as to what may or may not have happened.

At the end of the day, I stand by my statement. I think how people are treating this situation is overblown and completely ridiculous. The entitlement issues of people demanding a new ending and acting out like spoiled children is something I personally won't stand for and I know that's how both Scott and I felt. I just felt that the way people were crying foul seemed really inappropriate. There was no way to create an ending that everyone wants and is going to love. I love stories, and yes inconsistencies both me, but it didn't ruin my entire experience.

I think the biggest failing is that as good as the writers are at BioWare are, they ended with a Deus Ex Machina ending.

I don't think by any means did Scott and I say it was perfect, it's just we didn't have the same kinds of beef with it that others did. I didn't review the game for RPGamer, nor am I planning to do an SO, but while I understand the inconsistencies, that didn't ruin the experience or the impact that the end had on me. For me it was an emotional rush. Was it sloppy? Yes. But was it this giant turd people made it out to be? No. As I've said in a few circles, the ending reminds me of that of the works of E.M Foster, Robert Silverberg and Issac Asimov. They always wrote endings that never felt completely resolved and often left it to the imagination of the reader as to what may or may not have happened.

You may not have had any problems with the ending, but I and many others do. In addition, gaming is an interactive medium, as opposed to reading and watching, which are more passive. The biggest disappointment was that there was no payoff, something you expect from playing video games. There was none. Just three colors, explosions, and Buzz Aldrin's verbal meandering. And no, there's a difference between the endings of the writers you've mentioned and the ME3 ending. The endings of the authors you listed were deliberate, but left enough to let the readers think for themselves, as you said. With ME3's ending, there's nothing. Just the depressing realization that everything you fought for was for nothing because Casey Hudson wanted to be 'deep and profound'.

At the end of the day, I stand by my statement. I think how people are treating this situation is overblown and completely ridiculous. The entitlement issues of people demanding a new ending and acting out like spoiled children is something I personally won't stand for and I know that's how both Scott and I felt. I just felt that the way people were crying foul seemed really inappropriate. There was no way to create an ending that everyone wants and is going to love. I love stories, and yes inconsistencies bother me, but it didn't ruin my entire experience.

It would be entitlement if the people arguing for it contributed nothing. However, they did. With the time investment to their Shepard's story, the money they paid for the games, and the feedback, which Bioware asked for.

And frankly, I've been seeing a lot of condescension from a lot of the gaming press because 'they' don't seem to have a problem with it, but apparently, they have a problem when the gaming populace has the sheer gall to disagree. If that's the case, maybe they shouldn't be acting like such and get back to reviewing games instead of insulting the people that perhaps they erroneously seek advice for.

As a side note; if anyone wants to quote that piece of mental masturbation 'It's not the goal, but the journey that matters', then I guess you don't mind being told everything you did was for nothing after all that you did. Endings in stories are just as important as the rest of the story and to say that it doesn't matter is pretty hypocritical.

In short; The ending of Mass Effect 3 has left a very visible, and very ugly, black mark on an otherwise great series. If you're content with that, that's fine, just don't go around belittling people who expected better.

I've been seeing a lot of condescension from a lot of the gaming press because 'they' don't seem to have a problem with it, but apparently, they have a problem when the gaming populace has the sheer gall to disagree.

I've seen plenty of non-press that don't have a problem with the ending and lots of press that do have a problem, so just realize that before you start painting your strokes too broadly.

If you're content with that, that's fine, just don't go around belittling people who expected better.

I'm not entirely sure how your posts have been any better on that front, if you could point it out to me that would be greatly appreciated :D The gaming populace is allowed to disagree with some of the gaming press but members of the gaming press can't disagree with some of the gaming populace?

I'm also curious what value you attached to the forty+ hours that is the rest of the game and has the small bit at the end actually wiped that all enjoyment from that out for you? If so that seems like an odd position to me, but ok.

I'm not entirely sure how your posts have been any better on that front, if you could point it out to me that would be greatly appreciated :D The gaming populace is allowed to disagree with some of the gaming press but members of the gaming press can't disagree with some of the gaming populace?

See the response to Macstorm.

I'm also curious what value you attached to the forty+ hours that is the rest of the game and has the small bit at the end actually wiped that all enjoyment from that out for you? If so that seems like an odd position to me, but ok.

When you take in the entire experience of all three games as a whole, the ending, which is just as important as the rest of the story, can easily sour the rest of the story. I was initially planning on going through another run through of all three games as the biggest jerk in the history of the galaxy, but with the endings as they are, it's nigh impossible to *not* ask yourself, "What's the point?"

As a side note; if anyone wants to quote that piece of mental masturbation 'It's not the goal, but the journey that matters', then I guess you don't mind being told everything you did was for nothing after all that you did.

Except the ME3 ending doesn't do this at all.

Spoiler:

How was it supposed to end? Destroy an impossible to defeat galaxy wide threat with a big citadel powered cannon? That would have been awful. Anyway, I don't see how the ending makes everything else pointless. It doesn't. The friends you saved, survived, the races you gave a new future have that (unless you let the geth live and then chose to kill all synthetic life). The cost to accomplish the end result HAD to be high, and I think any ending where the mass relays survive and everything is hunky dory would have been terrible. I have no idea what people wanted.

Fair enough. It's just that I've seen 1up, Giantbomb, Joystiq, Kotaku, and several other gaming sites pretty much rail against the movement to have the ending changed. Insults included.

Yeah, there is no denying that. That said, I think both sides (fans of the ending and those that hate it) have points and should be able to discuss things rationally, especially without making it a complete fans vs press issue.

Iliya, with all due respect, not everyone feels the way you do. Even if you share an opinion with 100,000 other very vocal people, it doesn't mean there aren't 150,000 people who disagree. The reality is, Iliya, that those who didn't like the ending are very vocal, and in some cases, very rude about it. While most people agree that ending left something to be desired, exaggerated comments about it completely ruining the experience will eventually put some people who liked the game on the defensive (and, believe it or not, there were some that thought the ending was OK. I know it's hard to believe, but people do have different opinions about this!). According to both critic and reader reviews (93,85 scores respectively), a LOT of people really enjoyed the game overall. So, I don't believe the ending completely ruined the game in most people's opinion.

Nyxy isn't belittling the people who expected better...she's expressing frustration with the very vocal minority who feel entitled...who are on the net demanding that the ending be redone. I agree, personally, that too many people feel 'entitled' these days, and that the vocal reaction to ME3 is a great indicator of this. I've played plenty of games, watched movies, etc with an ending I didn't care for. On the rare occasion, I might even post my thoughts on a blog about it. If I honestly felt it ruined the experience, I may think twice before buying from that company again (or watching that show, etc). However, I never once thought about starting up petitions demanding that the creators make a 'better' ending. The vocal outpouring over this one is quite stunning IMHO. And, I can only wonder where it will lead. Perhaps when the season finale of a show comes out, and we don't like it, we can petition the producers and they'll make a 'better' ending and re-release the episode (or put the 'real' ending as a web feature on their site). The possibilities are endless! I'm just glad that, as a story writer myself, I don't rely on sales or pleasing stock holders. I make the ending I want ...hopefully people like it. If they don't...well, I'm sorry...but it IS the ending that my creative direction came up with...and I'm happy with it :) I'm open to critique, but don't tell me I have to change my ending to please you just because you bought some of my books.

Everyone has their own opinions on how ME3 ended. Every Deus Ex game has had the same type of choice ending at the, that's no different than how Mass Effect 3 ended, but there's not his huge entitlement outcry.

I was content witwh the voice over at the end, it's not perfect, but it's not the worst ending ever. I would love to have seen what happened with all the crew and friends that we had made during our travels, but it's not enough to go and make me flame bioware. I'd rather have a rational discussion with people and discuss how their ending went and talk about their thoughts on what happened. Ambiguity is a good thing, Inception was great because of the ambiguous ending. Yes, it's a different medium, but that's no reason for us to feel entitled to DEMAND Bioware change their ending because people didn't like it. It is what it is, show them your unhappiness with your wallett. Don't buy the DLC, don't sink more hours into the multiplayer. Don't buy their next game, but serisouly people filing claims against the FTC and submitting bad data to the BBB is silliness.

We want the industry to mature and be treated with respect in the mainstream media. People acting like spoiled children is as far from being a mature story telling medium as we can get. Acting like rational humans and not joining this mob mentality is one way to show that we can have mature discussions about the industry. Showing Bioware we're unhappy with the Mass Effect 3 ending, show them with your wallets and don't buy ME3 DLC and skip their next game.

Feel free to post on their forums, but think rationally before you fly off the handles. Rational discussions are the way to make a statement and who everyone that we're all not a bunch of entitled spoiled children.

How was it supposed to end? Destroy an impossible to defeat galaxy wide threat with a big citadel powered cannon? That would have been awful. Anyway, I don't see how the ending makes everything else pointless. It doesn't. The friends you saved, survived, the races you gave a new future have that (unless you let the geth live and then chose to kill all synthetic life). The cost to accomplish the end result HAD to be high, and I think any ending where the mass relays survive and everything is hunky dory would have been terrible. I have no idea what people wanted.

Spoiler:

Considering that the fight on Rannoch, and over Earth, proved that they're not invincible, it kinda puts the need of the Catalyst into question. It turns it into a McGuffin. As for your friends, sure, they're all stranded, after inexplicably running from the fight despite Joker's assertion that he's sticking around, on an uncharted jungle planet. Then there's the Turians and Quarians you've brought with you to Earth, who have no means to survive since they're stranded in Sol, which doesn't have the dextro-amino foods they need to survive, so, they're boned. And then there's the part where most of the governments of all the races are in shambles, all their colonies are pretty much toast, and the casualties are listed in the trillions, so, no, everything isn't hunky dory.

Speaking for myself, even still frames of the cast in rebuilding process and just a text of their eventual fate would have been preferable to nothing.

Considering that the fight on Rannoch, and over Earth, proved that they're not invincible, it kinda puts the need of the Catalyst into question. It turns it into a McGuffin. As for your friends, sure, they're all stranded, after inexplicably running from the fight despite Joker's assertion that he's sticking around, on an uncharted jungle planet. Then there's the Turians and Quarians you've brought with you to Earth, who have no means to survive since they're stranded in Sol, which doesn't have the dextro-amino foods they need to survive, so, they're boned. And then there's the part where most of the governments of all the races are in shambles, all their colonies are pretty much toast, and the casualties are listed in the trillions, so, no, everything isn't hunky dory.

Speaking for myself, even still frames of the cast in rebuilding process and just a text of their eventual fate would have been preferable to nothing.

Spoiler:

I didn't say it leaves things hunky dory, nor should it have. What I said was it doesn't make your choices pointless. Saving the Krogran? Yep they're off somewhere rebuilding their race. The characters you saved lived, and had who knows what other adventures (yes this part needs so more epilogue). It was never going to be a clean ending. All our Shepards were ever trying to do was to give the raves a chance to make their own future, which does happen. Their armies(or most of their armies) are now all stranded in the Sol system, this is true, or at the least have a long journey home. They have faster than light travel afterall. With the most intelligent races in the galaxy you don't think they can come up with some ways to build Prothean type life pods and send everyone on the long journey to their home worlds? How are the geth even an issue, they're machines! A bit more exposition would have helped, I certainly agree there, but the idea that the ending makes the many choices in the story pointless is just absurd.

Back to the reapers-ME1 proved they weren't invincible, but they are clearly incredibly hard to kill. Remember that this is basically the whole of the galaxy's might gathering at Earth and they're losing the battle. Also-the Protheans are clearly established as superior militarily, so to have an ending where you could succeed based on that alone would have been...strange.

Also-did you ever think perhaps the idea of campaigning to have Bioware change the ending might be a tad insulting to those that actually liked it?

thanks for not only misquoting me, but attributing it to sam. At the end of the day I'm okay with the end of ME3, i have some criticisms and a few outright complaints. maybe i'll voice them, probably when I'm sure it won't be drowned out by the immature, entitled mouth-breathers on the subject. The ending is not especially kubrickian that is for liara's last gift scene), but does hearken back to pre-trek SF, a tone that was prevalent in the first game and sadly lost in the second.

Having not played ME3, my impression of this whole kerfluffle is players expected "Happily ever after" and didn't get it in a way they wanted. Not every story has a 'perfect' ending.

That wasn't everyone's problem. My husband was fine with the part of the ending that wasn't "happily ever after," but he found the way that the ending was executed to be sloppy and poorly-written. That hasn't stopped him from loving the game and playing it constantly, but he would have preferred a better-executed ending. I think many of the reasonable complaints about the ending sound like his, it's just that of course those reasonable people tend to get drowned out by the more histrionic ones.